TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 323X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d/2013, i.e. quantum appeal, read as under: (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case and law on the subject, the CIT(A) has wrongly held that the a had not argued Gr. No.2 challenging the Re-opening of the assessment u/s 148. (2) On the facts and circumstances of the case law on the subject, the CIT(A) has totally ignored the affidavit of the counsel regarding the arguments before CIT(A). (3) On the facts and circumstances of the case law on the subject, the CIT(A) has wrongly held that the proceeding u/s 148 had been validly initiated. (4) On the facts and circumstances of the case and law on the subject, the CIT(A) has wrongly disallowed our claim to raise additional ground of appeal regarding the non-issue of the notice u/s 143(2) before making the assessment. 2.1 The ld. Counsel for the assessee has raised an additional ground of appeal as under:- The learned AO has wrongfully made the addition on account of gift received as under:- a. Santokben P. Patel Rs.8,28,000/- b. Santokben P. Patel (ornament) Rs.2,12,826/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l before the CIT(A) when the hearing took place on 01.07.2008. 4.3 During the present appeal proceedings which are for limited purpose of verifying whether any submissions/arguments were made against the validity of reopening of assessment, the appellant has chosen to rely on various case laws which are not relevant to the facts of his case rather than producing evidences which could show that the issue was pursued before my predecessor in appellate proceedings. 4.4 In view of the above facts and discussions, it is held that the appellant has not made any arguments on the validity of the reassessment proceedings before my predecessor and therefore the Ground No.2 regarding reopening of assessment was correctly dismissed by my predecessor vide his order dtd. 25- 07-2008. The other grounds of appeal have been dealt in detail and adjudicated by CIT(A) in his order dtd. 25-07-2008 and these are not required to be adjudicated again as no fresh facts have been submitted before me. 4.5. During the present appellate proceedings before me, the appellant raised an additional ground of appeal which had not been raised either before the ITAT or the CIT(A). The appellant submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re and requires extensive verification of facts. This was not raised before the original proceedings. In view of these facts and circumstances, the additional ground raised by the assessee cannot be admitted. Therefore, the plea in this behalf is dismissed. 5. Apropos main grounds, ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the affidavit filed before the lower authorities and written submissions to the effect that there is neither sufficient reason for reopening of assessment nor there is issuance of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act and the ITAT has jurisdiction to examine a question of law arising from the facts. Reliance is placed on following High Court judgments:- i) CIT vs. Cellulose Products of India Ltd, (1985) 151 ITR 499 (FB), ii) CIT vs. National Thermal Power Co. Ltd, 157 CTR 0249 iii) CIT vs. Smt. Maniben Valji Shah, 204 CTR 0249 iv) CIT vs. Geno Pharmaceuticals Ltd, 32 taxman.com 162 v) CIT vs. Mr. Salman Khan in ITA No.2362 of 2009 6. Ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, vehemently contends that the ld. CIT(A) in categorical terms, after due verification of records, has held that no arguments were made by the assessee at the time of hearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng any 154 application. On an application u/s 154, the appellate authority is obliged to decide the ground to correct the mistake. The ld. CIT(A) is a responsible appellate authority and there being a specific finding about ground No.2, it cannot be held that such categorical finding was given without justification. Besides, the successor CIT(A) also found the assessee s assertion to be baseless. In view of these facts and circumstances, I find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) in this behalf which is upheld. The assessee s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 8. Apropos ITA No.1711/Ahd/2013, i.e. the appeal against penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, the ld. Counsel for the assessee contends that there is neither any concealment of income nor any furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The assessee filed following documents:- (1) The donors have confirmed the gift. (2) The 'a' had filed the gift deed as well as affidavit of the donors confirming the gift. (3) The donors are assessed to tax. The donor had remained present before AO to give the statement, but AO refused to record the statement of the donors ultimately the donors filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
